Ever since 9-11, a great debate has been raging over security vs. freedom.

That act of terrorism in 2001 instilled fear in this nation, prompting many to accept more limits on their freedom in exchange for the veneer of increased security.

To say the Bush administration exploited that fear to increase government power would be an understatement. But manipulating public fear to increase government power predates Bush — it has happened all throughout history as foes real and imagined have been used as foils for more government power.

It’s the “boogyman” syndrome; create an illusion of an enemy or magnify the power of a real foe so as to justify more power and more money to fight back.
When the Soviet Union was a U.S. enemy during the long Cold War following WWII, its non-military power was in decline the entire time. When I first traveled to the Soviet Union in 1985, I was shocked at the level of poverty I saw and the rot of economic decline. It was clear even then that outside of a nuclear threat, the Soviet Union was a paper tiger and could never compete on the large world stage economically.

Despite knowing about the Soviet’s weak status, the U.S. government portrayed that nation as a major economic, political and military threat right up to the day it fell apart in 1991.

Today, it’s Islamic extremists that we fear. But while their individual acts of terrorism create fear, they in no way threaten to bring down our government. They’re too small, too weak and too distant to ever threaten a U.S. takeover.

What threatens to bring down our government is not some terrorist hiding in a cave in Pakistian, but rather the manipulation of fear to increase the power of our own government over its own people.

Unfortunately, a lot of people have fallen for it. Ask yourself these questions:

--Am I willing to allow the government to surreptitiously listen in on all my phone calls?

--Am I willing to allow the government to search my property, including online computer communication?

--Am I willing to have my travel within the U.S. tracked or limited by the government?

If you answered “yes” to those questions, then you value security over freedom and have fallen victim to the cult of fear that was created in the shadow of 9-11.

We’ve all heard that justified with something like this: “Well, if it keeps me and my family safe I don’t care if they (the government) read all my emails.”

Really? Are you so scared and fearful that you would be willing to allow the government to intrude that deep into your life? And do you really trust your own government to do the right thing with the information it collects on you?

In many ways, the U.S. has moved several steps toward the kind of activity we used to criticize about the old Soviet Union. The Soviets and many of their allies always encouraged people to spy on each other, neighbors on neighbors, family on family, children on parents.

To a lesser extent, the U.S. is now doing the same thing with the drumbeat of “report suspicious activity.”

But what if, in the name of national security, the U.S. mandated that all public schools instruct students to report on “suspicious activity” in their own homes. Would that be acceptable?

Terrorism cannot conquer the U.S. But the fear of terrorism can stifle our liberties and over time, erode the foundation on which our nation is built.

It’s time to stop the fear-mongering and the illogical belief that it’s OK to limit liberty in the name of national security.
Mike Buffington is editor of The Jackson Herald. He can be reached at mike@mainstreetnews.com.

You said it on the money Mikenation was founded as a republic ...for the REPUBLIC for witch it stands one nation under God... . This and justice for ALL. Our Govt is supposed to be controlled by law. As a child I said the pledge every morning in school. When I got to high school no more pledge and i was taught we lived under a democracy. A democracy is controlled by the majority rules. Their was a time when a mojority republican or demorcrate ment nothing the voice of the people was heard and the constatution upheld. This once great nation is falling to her knees and it makes me sad to think we have disregarded all the blood that has been shed to preserve her.

Great job of explaining the first half of the problem we face. As you said, Bush used the 9/11 crisis to infringe on our freedoms. Obama, on the other hand, is using the economic crisis to destroy our capitalist economy and to remove our economic freedoms in the name of redistribution and economic justice. If he gets his way, the damage will be much more lasting and irreversible than the Bush damage. After all, much of the legislation Bush got through can be reversed, but it will be next to impossible to reconstruct health insurance companies and medical facilities once they have been destroyed through ObamaCare. The dollar may recover over time, but at a considerable loss of our standard of living and that is assuming that the dollar is not replaced as the world's reserve currency.

If we are to learn from the Bush 9/11 example, we had better find a way to put a stop to the total economic destruction in the name of redistribution and economic justice envisioned by the Obama Thugocracy. Unfortunately, the democrat followers of Obama don't even realize what they are being used for and many of the republicans in Congress are so isolated from the real world that they don't see the full potential either.

Add Comment

Name

Email

Homepage

In reply to

Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:

Phone*

What is nine minus seven?

Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.